mm 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 


MASSACHUSETTS 

AGRICULTURAL 

COLLEGE 


Source 


.Gi_-P_-t 

430.0^ 


rn 


CHAPEL 


This  book  may  be  kept  out 

TWO   WEEKS 

only,    and    is    subject    to    a    fine    of    TWO 
CENTS  a  day  there^ 
the  day  indicated  be] 


Library  Bureau    13-723 


CARD 


IlTTEHlTATlOirAL   INSTITUTE  OF  AGHICULTUP.E 


•    •    • 


MISCELliilTEOUS  PUBLICATIOHK 


Volume  1 
Ml 


TABLE  OF  COITTEI^TS 

1.  Statement  concerning  the  institute.  J 

2.  Letter  to  Mr.  Perkins  relative  to  the  institute.  1909. 
5.  The  Institute  and  cooperative  banking.   1909. 

4.  Resolution  passed  by  the  national  grange.  1910.   2  copies 

5.  Price  Fluctuations  in  the  staples:  their  inl'luence  on 

the  v/elfare  of  the  state.   1910.   £  copies. 

6.  Its  Labors  in  behalj^'  of  economic  betterment.   1910. 

7.  General  introduction  to  the  bulletins  of  the  bureau  of 

agricultural  intelligence  and  of  diseases  of  plants. 

1910. 

8.  Heport  of  the  delegation  of  the  U.S.  to  the  general 

assembly  of  the  institute.   1911. 

9.  Message  from  the  president  of  the  U.S.   concerning 

creation  of  institute.   1906. 

10. Its  influence  on  economic  welfare.   1911. 

ll.Eaiffeisen  System  of  rural  cooperative  credit,  its 
adaptation  and  adoption  in  the  U.£".   1912. 

12.L'Activite  de  l^Institut.   1912. 

13. Le  Present  et  I'Avenir  de  l*Institut.   1912. 

14. Su  Importancia  para  la  America  Latina,  en  especial 
para  Chile.   1913. 

If.  .Message  from  the  president  of  the  U.S.  concerning 
the  general  assembly  of  the  institute.   1913. 

16. Board  of  Agriculture  and  fisheries.  The  Institute- 
Its  objects  and  its  publications.    1913. 

17. The  Landschaft.   Co-operative  rural  credit.   1913. 

16. Pamphlet  concerning  the  institute.   1913. 

19. The  Way  out  of  the  rut.   1913.  2  copies.  I 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  with  funding  from 

Boston  Library  Consortium  IVIember  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/internationalins01lubi 


TABLE  OF  COIITEITTS  (cont.) 

20.  Concerning  the  international  year  "booli  of 

agricultural  statistics.   1913,  1914. 

21.  Steadying  the  world's  prices  of  the  staples.  1914. 

22.  Proposal  for  an  international  conference  on  the 

regulation  and  control  of  ocean  carriage  by  means 
of  an  international  cornraerce  conii::i£sion. ...... 

2.'^.  Concerning  the  fourth  volume  of  the  International 
year-hook  of  agricultural  legislation.   1915. 

24.  Letter  to  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson  on  t?ie  work  of 

the  institute.   1918. 

25.  Our  foreign  trade  after  the  v/ar.   1918. 
26. 


6l8T  Congress,  )  SENATE.  j  Document 

1st  Session.       \  \     No.  85. 


INTERNATIONAL  INSTITUTE  OF  AGRICULTURE  AT  ROME. 


Mr.  Perkins  presented  the  following 

liETTER  WRITTEN  BY  DAVID  L,UBIN  TO  HON.  GEOBGE  C.  PEBKINS 
AND  HON.  FBANK  P.  FLINT  BELATIVE  TO  THE  INTERNATIONAL 
INSTITUTE  OF  AGBICULTUBE  AT  BOME. 


June  8,  1909. — Ordered  to  be  printed. 


Institut  International  d' Agriculture, 

Rome,  May  23,  1909. 

My  Dear  Senators:  I  have  recently  been  handed  a  copy  of  the 
Congressional  Record  of  February  20,  1909,  which  contains  some 
statements  in  relation  to  the  International  Institute  of  Agriculture 
at  Rome. 

These  statements,  if  true,  would  show  that  the  advocates  of  this 
institution  were  men  devoid  of  statesmanship,  of  honesty,  of  common 
sense — in  short,  men  of  unpatriotic  and  even  criminal  intent. 

If  these  statements  had  been  uttered  in  an  out-of-the-way  locality 
on  an  unimportant  occasion  and  by  obscure  men  they  would  call  for 
no  reply ;  but  as  they  were  spoken  during  a  public  session  of  Congress 
and  by  Congressmen,  I  deem  it  necessary  to  make  some  comments  on 
the  subject,  and  to  address  them  to  you,  because  the  ratification  of 
the  treaty  wliich  created  the  institute,  so  far  as  the  United  States  is 
concerned,  was  largely  due  to  the  powerful  aid  and  influence  exerted 
by  both  of  you  in  its  behalf. 

During  the  debate  in  the  House  of  Representatives  regarding  the 
International  Institute  of  Agriculture,  Congressman  Mann,  of  Illinois, 
said:  "This  agricultural  institute  is  a  pure  fake." 

In  saying  what  he  did  Mr.  Mann  was  either  right  or  wrong.  If  the 
advocates  of  the  institute  were  right,  then  Congressman  Mann  was 
wrong.  If  he  was  right,  then  you  two  gentlemen  were  wrong;  in  rec- 
ommending the  treaty  to  the  Senate  the  President  of  the  United  States 
and  the  Secretary  of  State  were  wrong;  and  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States  was  wrong  in  ratifying  it.  So,  then,  it  is  Congressman  Mann 
on  one  side  of  the  scale  and  you  two  gentlemen,  the  President,  the 
Secretary  of  State,  and  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  on  the  othe*. 
The  preponderance  of  authority  is  evident.  But  it  would  show  fee- 
bleness m  logic  if  we  were  merely  to  hide  behind  this  formidable  bul- 
wark of  authority  and  not  to  enter  into  the  merits  of  the  case.  Tliis 
I  propose  to  do  by  taldng  up  the  facts  as  they  are  a  little  later  on. 


2  INTERNATIONAL    INSTITUTE    OF    AGEICULTURE    AT    EOME. 

Before  proceeding  with  these  facts,  I  desire  to  consider  a  further 
assertion  made  by  Congressman  Mann.  He  says  that  this  institute  "is 
a  private  snap  over  in  Rome;  I  know  what  it  is,  *  *  *  It  is  not 
in  the  interests  of  agriculture;  it  is  for  a  particular  individual  *  *  * 
the  man  who  represents  the  Government  over  there,  drawing  the 
salary.     *     *     * 

In  answer  to  the  above  it  will  be  sufficient  for  me  to  quote  from  my 
letter  to  you  (Senator  Perkins)  of  April  13: 

*  *  *  "WTiile  tacitly  allowed  some  $3,500  a  year,  I  have  up  to  the  present  moment 
drawn  but  $100,  $80  of  which  were  applied  by  the  clerk  of  the  State  Department  (Mr. 
Morrison)  to  pay  for  the  portraits  of  Washington  and  Lincoln,  now  in  the  American 
Room  in  the  institute,  and  the  remainder  for  framing  the  pictures  in  this  room  of  the 
pioneer  workers  for  the  institute.  It  has  not  been  my  purpose  to  draw  a  salary  for 
this  work. 

vSo  much  for  the  salary  question. 

In  the  course  of  tliis  debate,  Mr.  Gaines,  of  Tennessee,  also  asked, 
"What  good  is  this  institution  doing  the  people  of  the  United  States?" 
and  Mr.  Rucker,  of  Missouri,  inquired,  "Is  it  not  also  true  that  there 
is  a  chance,  a  strong  probability,  that  if  we  carry  on  this  nonsensical 
work  over  there,  we  will  impart  to  other  nations  a  thousandfold  more 
than  we  receive?" 

These  are  pertinent  questions,  I  will  endeavor  to  answer  tlie 
inquiry,  "What  is  the  International  Institute  of  Agriculture?"  I 
will  confine  my  remarks  at  this  time  to  but  one  branch  of  its  labors, 
the  most  important  branch,  the  crop-reporting  division  of  the  institute. 

I  deem  it  essential  as  a  prelimmary  explanation  to  briefly  state 
how  prices  of  commodities  are  arrived  at.  Economists  tell  us  that 
the  law  of  supply  and  demand  determines  the  price.  But,  right  here, 
we  must  note  the  difference  between  manufactured  commodities  and 
raw  material.  The  prices  of  manufactures  are  largely  determined  by 
private  sales,  whereas  the  prices  of  the  staples  of  agriculture  are  deter- 
mined by  public  sales  at  "wheatpits,"  "cotton  exchanges,"  "bourses," 
etc.  We  are  here  concerned  with  the  prices  of  the  staples  of  agricul- 
ture, and  the  question  is,  How  do  the  exchanges  and  bourses  arrive 
at  the  price? 

Applying  the  law  of  supply  and  demand,  we  find  that  the  "de- 
mand," so  far  as  the  number  of  consumers  is  concerned,  is  fairly 
manifest,  but  now  let  us  see  how  it  is  with  the  "supply."  Here  we 
are  not  alone  concerned  with  the  stock  on  hand,  but  also  with  the 
condition  of  the  growing  crops. 

If  the  summaries  of  the  supply  for  the  United  States — that  is,  the 
stock  on  hand  and  the  condition  of  the  growing  crops — were  .given 
out  only  by  the  operators  in  the  "wheat  pits,"  "cotton  exchanges," 
and  "bourses,"  they  would,  of  course,  be  given  out  by  interested 
parties,  and  would  therefore  be  untrustworthy.  Such  untrustworthy 
summaries  would  give  rise  to  violent  fluctuations  in  prices,  endan- 
gering not  alone  the  interests  of  the  farmers,  but  likewise  those  of 
the  manufacturers,  for  these  products  are  the  raw  material  of  the 
factories.  In  other  words,  they  would  jeopardize  the  interests  of 
the  capital  and  labor  of  the  farm  and  the  capital  and  labor  of  the 
factory. 

It  is  for  this  reason  that  the  United  States  has  built  up  and  now 
maintains  the  various  bureaus  in  its  Government  for  the  purpose  of 
informing  the  people  at  stated  periods  of  the  stocks  on  hand  and  the 
condition  of  the  growing  crops. 


INTERNATIONAL   INSTITUTE   OF   AGRICULTURE   AT   ROME.  3 

So  valuable  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  is  this  service  that 
there  is  now  no  power  which  could  abolish  this  source  of  public  infor- 
mation; and,  were  it  abolished,  the  evils  which  would  follow  would 
be  so  apparent  that  its  immediate  reestablishment  would  be  de- 
manded. Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the  United  States  Government, 
by  getting  out  official  summaries  of  the  supply,  is  a  factor  in  the 
equities  of  price  formation  for  the  staples  of  agriculture,  thereby 
promoting  the  welfare  of  the  people  of  the  United  States. 

Thus  far  Congressmen  Gaines  and  Rucker  will  undoubtedly  agree 
with  me.     But  let  us  go  a  step  further. 

The  United  States  is  an  exporting  country  of  the  staples  of  agri- 
culture. It  exports  continuously,  and  the  exporters  only  pay  the 
American  producers  prices  formed  in  competition  with  similar  prod- 
ucts of  the  other  nations  of  the  world.  In  other  words,  the  exports 
are  sold  at  the  world's  price. 

But  what  of  the  greater  quantity  remaining  for  home  use?  Is  this 
sold  at  a  higher  than  the  world's  price  by  reason  of  the  United  States 
crop-reporting  system?  How  can  this  be?  For  the  export  and  the 
home  price  are  the  same,  since  the  exporters  and  the  home  buyers 
buy  in  the  same  "pit,"  "exchange,"  or  "bourse,"  and  at  the  same 
time.  In  other  words,  all  the  staples  of  agriculture  in  the  United 
States  are  sold  at  the  world's  price. 

Now,  the  question  is,  "How  is  the  world's  price  determined?"  We 
stated  previously  that  the  "law  of  supply  and  demand"  determines 
the  price,  and  that  the  world's  "demand"  is  fairly  manifest.  But 
how  does  the  case  stand  regarding  the  knowledge  of  the  world's 
"supply?"  _ 

About  this  way:  Several  of  the  more  prominent  nations  have  crop- 
reporting  bureaus  which  assemble  and  disseminate  the  facts  regard- 
ing the  supply  in  their  respective  countries,  but  each  of  them  does  so 
in  its  own  peculiar  way.  By  far  the  larger  number  of  the  nations 
have  no  crop-reporting  system  at  all.  In  those  countries  the  crop 
reports  are  gathered  by  private  interests.  It  is  all  these  sources 
together  which  go  to  make  up  the  various  official  and  unofficial  sum- 
maries as  to  the  world's  supply. 

The  disseminated  summaries  are  as  divergent  as  are  the  interests 
of  those  who  disseminate  them. 

But  is  there  not  a  flaw  in  the  logic  of  the  case?  In  a  former  para- 
graph it  was  stated  that  the  crop-reporting  bureau  at  Washington 
was  performing  a  task  which  promoted  the  welfare  of  the  people  of 
the  United  States,  and  now  we  learn  that  the  United  States  sells  its 
product  at  the  world's  price,  and  that  this  world's  price  is  based  on 
the  summary  of  the  world's  supply,  and  that  this  world's  summary, 
whether  official  or  nonofficial,  is  unreliable. 

Where,  then,  do  we  stand?  In  this  position:  The  crop-reporting 
bureau  of  the  United  States  in  a  measure  benefits  the  world  directly, 
and  the  people  of  the  United  States  indirectly.  If  the  people  of  the 
United  States  are  to  be  fully  benefited  by  their  crop-reporting  sys- 
tem, there  must  be  evolved  similar  crop-reporting  systems  in  the 
other  countries  of  the  world,  for,  as  Secretary  Wilson  so  pointedly 
says:  "Reports  covering  part  of  an  area  of  a  given  crop  may  be  used 
by  self-interested  crop-reporting  agencies  to  mislead."  In  short, 
there  must  be  given  out  at  stated  periods,  and  to  all  the  world,  an 
authoritative  official  world's  summary  covering  the  entire  area  of  the 


4  INTERNATIONAL    INSTITUTE    OF    AGRICULTURE    AT    ROME. 

crops.  Only  then  will  the  circuit  of  information  be  completed.  Only 
then  will  the  world's  supply  be  known.  Only  then,  when  equity  in 
the  formation  of  prices  of  the  staples  of  agriculture  is  established, 
will  the  United  States  be  fully  benefited. 

Eight  here  is  the  need  that  called  into  being  the  International 
Institute  of  Agriculture.  This  is  the  work  it  is  intended  to  perform. 
Its  function  is  to  show  this  need,  to  get  the  nations  to  complete  their 
crop-reporting  systems,  to  get  them  to  harmonize  the  data  to  the 
end  that  the  institute  may  gather  from  the  nations  the  facts  regard- 
ing their  crops,  summarize  them,  and  disseminate  them  promptly  to 
all  the  world. 

This  work  the  International  Institute  of  Agriculture  is  instructed 
to  perform  by  the  treaty  ratified  by  forty-eight  governments,  which 
is  its  constitution. 

This  is  the  very  work  had  in  view  by  the  Department  of  State  in 
its  instructions  of  September  14,  1908,  prepared  by  the  Department 
of  Agriculture  and  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor,  which 
outlined  "the  initial  policy  of  the  United  States  Goverment  in  the 
formative  work  of  the  institute." 

And  now  it  is  in  order  to  deal  with  the  question:  "What  is  the 
institute  doing?"  or,  as  it  was  expressed  in  the  debate  in  Congress  by 
Mr.  Young,  of  Michigan:  "Does  this  institution  issue  a  report?" 
"Does  it,"  as  Mr.  Gaines,  of  Tennessee,  inquired,  "do  any  of  the  work 
which  has  been  referred  to  it?" 

In  reply  to  the  above,  I  will  quote  from  an  official  address  delivered 
b}^  the  president  of  the  International  Institute  on  May  14  of  this  year: 

The  international  treaty  creating  the  institute  was  signed  ad  referendum  by  the 
delegates  of  the  nations  on  June  7,  1905.  The  plenipotentiaries  of  the  several  govern- 
ments placed  their  signatures  to  said  treaty  between  July,  1905,  and  June,  1906.  *  *  * 
The  institute  was  inaugurated  on  May  23,  1908.  *  *  *  The  permanent  committee 
has  been  working  since  then  ceaselessly,  but  there  are  many  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
founding  a  new  institution,  which  has  the  double  character  of  a  diplomatic  and  an 
economic  body.     *    *    * 

The  institute  must  obtain  an  accurate  knowledge  of  the  agricultm^al  statistical  serv- 
ices in  the  several  countries.  *  *  *  It  must  assemble  an  inventory  of  the  agricul- 
tural resomces  of  the  countries  and  of  their  average  and  normal  production,  which 
will  be  of  use  as  a  starting  point  and  as  a  term  of  comparison  for  futm'e  periodical 
information. 

■  This  work  the  institute  has  well  in  hand.  There  is  reason  to  hope  that  it  will  be  able 
to  publish  within  the  current  year  the  results  of  these  researches,  the  importance  of 
which  will  be  obvious  to  all. 

The  institute  must  accomplish  another  and  more  difficult  task. 

It  must  get  all  the  governments  to  observe  uniformity  in  the  following  particulars: 

(a)  The  number  and  nature  of  the  data  supplied  by  each  country  for  each  staple. 

(6)  The  date  and  mode  of  stating  for  each  staple,  the  estimated  yield  in  a  percentage 
ratio  of  a  term  of  comparison,  which  should  be  identical  for  all  the  countries. 

(c)  The  interval  to  be  decided  on  between  the  getting  in  of  the  harvest,  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  statistical  reports,  and  the  publication  of  same. 

(d)  The  indication  of  amounts  by  either  weight  or  measure.     *    *    * 

The  first  difficulties  have  been  overcome;  the  statutes  of  the  institute  have  been 
approved;  the  bureaus  are  organized,  the  preliminary  studies  are  accomplished;  the 
work  has  begun.  I  hope  *  *  *  that  the  institute  will  be  in  a  position  to  begin 
its  regular  official  service  in  January,  1910. 

Had  all  that  has  been  said  been  known  previously  to  Congressmen 
Mann,  Rucker,  Young,  and  Gaines  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
they  would  have  been  the  friends  of  the  institute  rather  than  its 
opposers;  we  may  even  assume  that  from  having  read  what  is  here 
put  forth  they  will  be  the  friends  of  the  institute  in  the  future.  But 
the   important   question  is   this:  Is  the   International   Institute  of 


INTERNATIONAL   INSTITUTE   OF   AGKICULTURE    AT    ROME.  5 

Agriculture  a  necessity  for  the  people  of  the  United  States?     Is  it 
imperative  ? 

Before  anyone  can  say  that  it  is  not  they  must  show  that  there  is 
no  need  for  an  authoritative  world's  summary  of  the  staples  of  agri- 
culture; that,  under  the  present  system,  and  without  the  institute, 
the  American  producers  and  consumers  are  sufficiently  guided  by  the 
information  they  now  have,  information  not  alone  of  the  crops  of  the 
United  States  but  of  the  world.     Can  that  be  shown? 

In  a  football  game  between  two  contesting  teams  would  it  be  con- 
sidered fair  to  have  the  game  umpired  by  a  member  playing  in  one 
of  the  contesting  teams?  Yet  that  is  precisely  what  is  done  in  the- 
great  business  of  the  agricultural  industry.  The  farmers  produce, 
and  the  buyers  have  all  the  say  as  to  what  the  price  shall  be,  and 
this  price  is  based  upon  the  total  of  the  world's  supply,  which  total 
they  furnish.  And  we  know  what  that  price  will  be,  from  that  rare 
economist  of  old,  who  said:  "  'It  is  nought,  it  is  nought,'  saith  the 
buyer,  but  when  he  hath  bought,  he  goeth  his  way  boasting." 

This  would  be  humorous  indeed  if  the  evils  of  the  present  system 
were  not  so  dangerously  far-reaching.  There  was  a  time  when  this 
evil  was  feebly  organized,  but  in  our  day  of  colossal  combinations; 
of  gigantic  organizations  of  capital,  cunning,  and  craft;  of  master- 
ship in  the  employment  of  these  powerful  agencies,  is  it  safe  to  leave 
this  power  for  evil  in  the  hands  of  interested  parties  ? 

We  increase  our  army,  we  augment  our  navy,  all  for  the  sake  of 
conserving  the  nation;  but  v/hat  good  can  our  army  do,  of  what 
value  our  navy,  so  long  as  a  few  rich,  powerful,  and  crafty  organizers 
may  determine  the  factor  which  goes  to  make  the  price  of  our  staples 
of  agriculture?  Here  the  very  foundation  of  the  structure  upon 
which  this  nation  rests  is  within  easy  tampering  reach  of  an  enemy 
infinitely  more  difficult  to  perceive,  to  control,  to  overcome  than  all 
the  foreign  powers  of  the  world.  And  who  can  deny  this?  It  can 
not  be  denied.     It  is  true. 

Since  this  is  true,  what  is  to  be  done?  Can  any  one  suggest  an 
alternative  other  than  maldng  the  governments  themselves  the  um- 
pires ?  Can  any  one  find  a  more  effective  plan  than  that  the  world's 
summary  be  suppHed  by  the  united  efforts  of  the  governments  of 
the  world?  And  the  redeeming  effect  of  such  a  united  effort  is  one 
of  the  evidences  clearly  showing  that  the  safety  of  the  nations  is 
dependent  upon  international  cooperation  and  amity. 

In  this  united  effort  it  becomes  the  duty  of  each  of  the  adhering 
nations  to  take  its  stand  as  a  master,  a  leader,  guiding  and  directing 
the  institute  in  its  work;  each  of  the  nations  as  master  and  the  insti- 
tute as  servant.  These  masters  must  not  merely  act  the  part  of 
quiescent  onlookers,  but  that  of  directors,  guiding  the  labors  of  the 
institute,  in  order  that  it  may  adequately  perform  the  task  which 
has  been  intrusted  to  it. 

In  ratifying  the  treaty  which  created  the  institute,  the  United 
States  has  assumed  a  duty  which  it  is  boi  nd  to  perform.  That  no 
mistake  is  made  in  this  statement  is  evident  from  the  concluding 
sentence  of  the  treaty  proclaimed  by  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  in  which  he  said : 

Now,  therefore,  be  it  known  that  I,  Theodore  Roosevelt,  President  of  the  United 
States  of  America,  have  caused  the  said  convention  to  be  made  public,  to  the  end 
that  the  same  and  every  article  and  clause  thereof  may  be  observed  and  fulfilled 
with  good  faith  by  the  United  States  and  the  citizens  thereof. 


6  INTERNATIONAL  INSTITUTE  OF  AGRICULTURE  AT  ROME. 

In  pursuance  thereto  it  becomes  the  manifest  duty  of  the  United 
States,  as  an  adhering  power  to  the  treaty,  to  observe  the  require- 
ments of  articles  2  and  7  of  the  same,  which  provide  that  each  adher- 
ing power  must  be  represented  by  delegates  on  the  general  assembly 
and  on  the  permanent  committee. 

I  confidently  believe  the  Government  of  the  United  States  will 
fulfill  these  requirements;  and  that  it  will  fulfill  them  not  in  any 
perfunctory  spirit,  but  in  a  manner  worthy  of  its  exalted  standing 
among  the  nations,  and  that  it  will  be  worthily  represented  at  the 
Second  General  Assembly  of  the  International  Institute  of  Agri- 
culture to  be  held  in  November,  1909, 

In  the  hope  that  what  has  been  here  set  forth  will  meet  with  your 
approval,  and  with  the  assurance  of  my  high  esteem,  I  have  the 
honor  to  remain. 

Yours,  very  sincerely, 

David  Lubin. 

Hon.  George  C.  Perkins  and  Hon.  Frank  P.  Flint, 
United  States  Senate,  Washington,  D.  C. 

o 


